All of us who are struggling with the dilemma of how to grasp the full measure of what's happening in theory with the "Left," Marxism, thinkers like Habermas, should find this post of Thomas McDonald's interesting. There's been lots of discussion on the Hab list on this post. Nag me to catch up for you. We'll return to this issue of Islam and Modernization presently in moot court, and next Fall in our theory seminar. March 19, 2002. jeanne

On Friday, March 8, Thomas McDonald posted to Hab list:

In response to my post "Why has Islam failed to modernize?" I received
two responses that I believe so accurately characterize *the division*
that cripples the contemporary Left in *the struggle to organize a
credible challenge to capitalism*. It also seems to me that the
possibility of healing this division is what attracts people to
Habermas's project..

I must admit that I purposely framed the question "Why has Islam failed
to modernize?" specifically to lure these two types of responses
because I believe this question draws out the heart of the division in
the contemporary Left. I am personally divided about how to reconcile
this kind of division, which is why I put the question out in the way
that I did..

Forgive me for not taking time to quote specifically from each post. I
just wanted to spit this out as quick as I could. I take full
responsibility for these being *my interpretations*, made for sake of
argument:

Ali responded from what I would call a Postmodern Left stance. Ali
expressed an outrage at perceived *insensitivity* on my part toward
'the other' by using words like 'failure' to describe Islam (regardless
of the fact that my accusation was pointing to it's failure at
pluralism). Then, to further justify defence of 'the other' (because
all non-hegemonic 'others' tend to be automatically defended by the
Postmodern Left, regardless of circumstances) Ali rationalized that
Islamic fundamentalism was only being targeted by America because it is
*a* form of resistance to capitalism. This rationalization assuages
some on the Left, but not people like Bob..

Bob responded from what I would call a Modern Left (or neo-Marxist)
stance. As much as Bob might dislike America, he understands Marx.
Modernists (like Habermas, opposed to radical postmodernism) still
believe in 'progress'. A society *must progress* past mythical,
premodern psychologies to achieve liberation. Capitalism is a necessary
stage that must be reached before it can be surpassed with Socialism
(while the idea that 'others' 'must progress' is painfully offensive to
the Postmodern Left). From this Modern Left perspective, one has to be
against Islamic fundamentalism in this war, on the grounds of a
Socialist Ideal that rejects *all* religious claims to absolute Truth.

This division has the American and European Left in knots. Not only
about this war.. but I think this problem represents a deeper problem
that is stopping the Left from organizing a legitimate challenge to
capitalism.

Until these divided perspectives can reconcile their differences,
capitalism rules.

I'm looking for an answer to this problem as much as anyone else, since
I have sympathies for both Jesus and Marx. I'm motivated by the
transcendance of soul and body over capitalist oppression.

This is basically why I'm interested in Habermas. He seems to be the
only contemporary thinker pointing the way toward such a reconciliation
within the Left.
"Something was lost when sin became guilt."
-Jurgen Habermas
Regards,
Tom